Bulk waste generators contribute 48,000-64,000 tonnes of waste per day in urban India
House keeping staff managing segregated wet waste at a plant in Close South Nirvana, Gurugram. Photo: Vikas Choudhary / CSE In an era of rapid urbanisation, burgeoning population and altering trends in global consumerism, sustainable solid waste management has been a challenge to Indian cities.
Nearly 31 per cent of the total population in India lives in the urban agglomerations, generating large quantities of waste every now and then.
Our urban periphery is haunted with overarching problems of piled-up waste and associated environmental pollution, resulting in massive environmental, economic and health problems.
India generates 160,000 tonnes of waste per day, according to the Central Pollution Control Board’s annual report for 2020-2021. Of this, nearly 31 per cent remains unaccounted for, accumulating on the streets, back lanes of the residents, waterbodies or drains and nullhas.
This waste transforms into garbage vulnerable points or creates mini dumpsites in every piece and bit of the city and eventually ends up either in landfills or in marine ecosystems.
The Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA) estimated that nearly 30-40 per cent of waste in a city is generated by bulk waste generators (BWG). The Solid Waste Management (SWM) Rules, 2016 defines BWG as entities with an average waste generation rate exceeding 100 kgs per day, including all streams of waste.
BWGs contribute 48,000-64,000 tonnes of waste per day in urban India. SWM rules also mandate BWGs to manage the organic waste they produce within their premises as much as possible.
The rule intends to reduce the management and financial burden on urban local bodies (ULB), restrict waste from entering landfills and reduce air, soil and groundwater pollution as well as the city’s carbon footprint.
Besides directing in-situ organic waste management by adopting composting or bio-methanation methods, the law also mandates source segregation and handing over of dry and other recyclables to authorised waste collectors.
Given their significant share in the total waste generation, BWG’s actions play a crucial role in determining the future of Swachh Bharat Mission 2.0, which targets to make the cities “garbage-free”.
The Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organization (CPHEEO) under the MoHUA released a step-by-step guideline for bulk solid waste generators in 2017, detailing the implementation modalities for the BWGs and the ULBs mentioned in SWMR. The excerpts from the guideline are detailed below.
The SWM Rules emphasise waste generators’ (including the BWGs) time-bound roles and responsibilities. It mandates all ULBs to prepare or amend their municipal bylaws on SWM and notify it. Here are some of its mandates:
BWGs are the single largest source of waste generation in any city. If cities can map all BWGs within their jurisdiction along with the quantity of waste they generate, the entire planning and management of the solid waste ecosystem would be more systematic and sustainable.
The SBM Urban dashboard data shows some city-specific data on the number of BWGs. However, the data is severely underestimated, and no national inventory can provide the number of total BWGs, the quantum of waste generated by them and the amount of waste processed onsite.
Therefore, each city must prepare an inventory of the existing BWGs after scientifically mapping, identifying and quantifying the waste generated and treated.
The city administration should report the same by establishing an institutional monitoring mechanism.
A field-level study of bylaws and BWG compliances by Delhi-based non-profit Centre for Science and Environment revealed striking gaps between the policy and practice. The following challenges were observed:
Byelaw mandates: While the bylaws mandate some duties for the waste generators in general and BWGs in specific, they stipulate some obligatory duties for the cities. During the field study, it has been observed that cities had limited visibility to provide comprehensive institutional support — weak enforcement furthers this.
Data and quantification: The quantum of waste generated by the BWGs and organic waste processed in situ should be an integral part of a city Solid Waste Management Plan (CSWAP). While many cities have reportedly undertaken the surveys in some form or another, they did not collect relevant data on the quantity of waste being produced and compliance with the legal mandate.
Source segregation: Source segregation of waste is critical in creating a sustainable system for waste management by BWGs. The mandate by SWM Rules reaffirms this.
Unfortunately, source segregation continues to be the hurdle cities struggle to overcome. However, there are bright examples where cities have invested significantly in communications to change the behaviour of waste generators, including BWGs, many of which have paid good dividends.
Capacity building: CSE researchers observed a huge demand for capacity building on the part of the ULBs to manage BWGs. On the other hand, BWGs also are in need of capacity-building support from the local government.
A comprehensive capacity-building plan and a roadmap focusing on uncomplying entities can address this issue.
Space constraints: Many residential complexes, malls and hotels in cities have space constraints to set up organic waste processing facilities within their premises, even if they are willing to. In such cases, the onus is on the local government to explore options for BWGs.
Even the CPHEEO guidelines for BWGs also take the same stand. Cities are usually incapacitated to support them. Keeping space for SWM facilities in every building plan is a mandate in Building Plan Acts, but that has too often been ignored.
In a classic case in Gurugram, the municipal government provided space to a cluster of housing societies where a common composting unit has been set up.
Enforcement: Enforcement of the provision under SWM Rules for BWGs continues to be a downside nationwide. Even though legal mandates are available and bylaws have been notified, enforcement has been limited.
Enforcement of penal provisions resulted in meagre recovery. User charges for the collection of dry waste also have been significantly low.
User charges and engagement of the informal sector: Bulk Waste generators are mandated to pay user charges fixed by the local body for the dry waste collection services they receive. However, in many instances, user charges are not collected regularly because of the residents’ reluctance to pay.
In many instances, BWGs preferred to engage unauthorised informal waste collectors as a cheaper solution. As a result, ULB lost significant revenue and wet waste collected by the informal waste pickers dumped elsewhere in the city had to be cleaned by the ULBs at their cost, thereby increasing their financial burden. This raises another question — Is it time to consider creating a space for the informal waste pickers as service providers to the BWGs in Indian cities?
Penalties: SWM Rules 2016 and corresponding byelaws have specific mention of penal provisions for contravention of byelaws, which include mixing waste, open dumping, littering, burning of waste and non-compliance with the BWG norms, among others.
In thousands of instances, challans were issued against BWGs in various cities for violating the legal mandate. In most cases, the amount charged was never recovered. Therefore, a penal provision must be enforced with appropriate institutional mechanisms; Otherwise, the void will continue to exist.
Incentives: The city governments must consider creating provisions in their bylaws to reward complying BWGs. They can be incentivised by providing property or water tax rebates, partial waiver of user charges, etc, to create an environment of mutual trust and understanding.
Cities like Pune, Rajamahendravaram, and Indore have incorporated specific incentive schemes to foster waste management by BWGs which has been found to be very effective.
Data inventory and monitoring: A majority of the cities are suffering from the absence of data inventory to manage BWGs efficiently. In addition, every city must consider setting up a dedicated monitoring mechanism to track compliance and ensure regular and timely collection of dry waste.
The city administration should offer technical and capacity-building support and hold onsite inspection and supervision and regular meetings with the representatives of BWGs, among others.
Improving the ecosystem to manage solid waste by BWGs should be a top priority. Compliance can only be achieved by adopting the steps mentioned in the SWM rules and CPHEEO guidelines, as detailed above.
Municipal bylaws should also incorporate appropriate changes to address the agenda more stringently with explicit provisions for communication strategy, capacity building, monitoring, incentive schemes and penal provisions.
Apart from a stringent enforcement mechanism, comprehensive institutional support should be mandatory in all ULBs. There are many good practices around BWGs where innovative approaches, including specific measures to secure community participation, have created sustainable systems.
Click here to attend CSE event on solid waste management
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
.png)
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.